Evidence for God from Science

in all my years of religious debate ive noticed that there are athiests with many kinds of ideologies

1) the unchanging thiest
i think people are athiests because its easier to denounce a belief rather than admit that youre wrong and turn your life around-people hear what they want to hear whenever something doesnt measure up to their standards as aceptable its labeled as the minority of ideas the idea of a god existing is too much to handle for them and they dont want to admit that most of the athiests i know are scared to turn their lives around and change their liiftsyles

2) the athiests that finds faith a joke athiests also think faith is a joke because they believe that when you want to hear something badly enough you will hear it

REASONS TO CHANGE YOUR LIFE NOW

1) there are major inconsistencies with the athieistic beliefe
the big bang theory is basically saying there was a bang and everything was created but thats no different than saying a car doesnt have manuufacturer and that cars and everything appear out of no where our curculatory system is to complicated to have formed on its own


the entrance page to this site expands more on these things

trees, are you directing this to any specific person? This doesn't seem to lead to any discussion, merely a discourse. Please read through the discussion guidelines.

oh im sorry well i just wanted to know what other people think the atheist ideology is

treeschanna510 wrote:oh im sorry well i just wanted to know what other people think the atheist ideology is

Well Treeschanna for my own 2 cents on it I think Atheists are people who believe they do not believe in a faith, religion or else. Still, they believe in something anyhow! My favorite atheist sometimes bring me back on earth at some point. I think he will thus not stay an atheist for long .

I like what 17th century Christian philosopher Blaise Pascal came up with in his writings, about believing in God or Not. I will try to find the English version of it and paste it in here for you...

Kindly,

Zebulon

Here is a short resume of the theory to the belief in God
Pascal's Wager (... known as Pascal's Gambit) is Blaise Pascal's application of decision theory to the belief in God. It is one of three 'wagers' which appear in his Pensées, a collection of notes for an unfinished treatise on Christian apologetics. Pascal argues that it is always a better "bet" to believe in God, because the expected value to be gained from believing in God is always greater than the expected value resulting from non-belief. Note that this is not an argument for the existence of God, but rather one for the belief in God. Pascal specifically aimed the argument at such persons who were not convinced by traditional arguments for the existence of God. With his wager he sought to demonstrate that believing in God is advantageous to not believing, and hoped that this would convert those who rejected previous theological arguments.

Pascal was a Mathematician, phylosopher and scientist who converted to christianity.

Type Blaise Pascal on Google and you will find a lot of information on his writings and thoughts.

Take care,

Zebulon

Trees,

Your OP is both valid and relevant to today. Atheistic ideology is riddled with confusion. Most atheists I come across are ether in denial or outright liars. Here's why: Tell an atheist he has belief in no god or gods and he'll hit back with a profanity-ridden rant of how he merely lacks belief in god/gods. Then try to tell him that this constitutes agnosticism and you will get the whole shebang in terms of profanities… It's a highly amusing game to play with the atheist. He will even call himself something called an agnostic-atheist (which is nonexistent) and cite Wikipedia to support this. Then try telling him that Wikipedia saying something IS doesn't make it so and the profanity-levels rise all the more. As I said, this is either denial or outright lies…

Atheism = the belief in no god or gods — Illustrated Oxford dictionary.

Agnosticism = unwilling to adjudicate on the evidence available.

I was told by an atheist once the Oxford is wrong, while telling me the Wikipedia is right…I kid you not! I had a whale of a time with these atheists. They are so scared to admit to a belief, citing lack of belief, which of course is agnosticism. But of course many, many atheists despise agnostics/cism. Say to an atheist…”Welcome to the world of agnosticism” and they will freak out! Truth is an atheist positively BELIEVES there is no god, yet they are so afraid of actually admitting this that they tie themselves up in all sorts of knots to escape admitting a belief system; it is hysterical!!

So in summary atheism is in all sorts of trouble: there is no evidence for atheism; there is no moral compass to atheism; there is no logic to atheism; and when its adherents squirm and wriggle such as they do is it any wonder? Haha. We must pause to laugh and relish in the decline of this weird, confused worldview. It is a joy to behold. And let no one tell you it is not very Christian to relish in the decline of this vacuous worldview; any Christian who tells you this is, I would venture, a little too “up their own behind” not to appreciate the fall of this skewed worldview. Any atheist who says the same you must ask on what grounds are they appealing to…Ask them why they are so morally indignant…To what objective standard are they appealing…

I've found there are a pretty wide spectrum of ideologies for those who call themselves atheists.

Some are militantly anti-religious thought. Some are open to discussing things and respond positively to a reasoned and respectful conversation. Some are really agnostics and can come to understand that better when the terms are described and clarified.

Lumping everyone into a big group and speaking in broad generalities usually says more about the people speaking in those terms than those being spoken about in my opinion.

because the funny thing is ive known alot of athiests and wether youve observed it or not they do kind of all come together as groups this forum is just to discuss the different kinds everyone has seen

danny i love your response by the way i was telling this athiest about god long story short i basically tore apart his big bang theory because of how inconsistent it was and i said to him but in a way you still have faith the only difference is you have faith that god doesnt exist because beliefe only starts out as beliefe and as it gets stronger it becomes faith by the end he was so confused the funny thing is he only believed in science but today science in and of itself if anything is starting to point towards the existance of god not only that but he said " i dont wanna be involved in crazy theories" but the hilarious thing is science is a theory science is based on theory without theory science wouldnt exist because its basically just the testing of a theory so after we went over how "stable" science was and how consistent christianity is and how god is the one who gave us ground to have science at the end he was like "you know what i dont know!" and isaid ok so you dont believe in anything then he said "exactly!" so i was like "lemme know how that works out for ya"

treeschanna510 wrote:because the funny thing is ive known alot of athiests and wether youve observed it or not they do kind of all come together as groups this forum is just to discuss the different kinds everyone has seen

P.S. bart sometimes i feellike youre trying to sabotage my posts

Be carefull with your emotions Trees, I don't see where Bart tried to sabotage your posts?

Or am I missing something?

Kindly

Zebulon

I heard an amazing talk from one of me alumni today and it reminded me that we are to remember that these people, these souls, are ones that God weeps over. They are the lost lambs and the lost coin, the prodigal son.

We may be at war war, but these are lost souls with which we battle. It behooves us to do the utmost to witness to them, instead of treating them as a game.

Do we weep over them as God weeps over them? Do we consider that this is the reason why Christ cam and died, that He may have died for them?

Are we planting the seeds or destroying the soil?

i am witnessing to them i wasnt making a game out of that guybut i was witnessing to him and i agree that its side but sometimes in general when people get overly freaked out its hilarious

I wasn't directing that to you personally. If anything, I was remembering when times when I would become callous to them. Sometimes there are times when a harsh answer is required. What distresses me, and hopefully all of us, is when my heart is harsh and callous even when a blunt answer is required.

In teaching, we fight this many times, when giving disciplinary actions, it's easy to let the heart become hard to the person and forget that reconciliation is the hoped for goal.

i do try my best to show them mercy because its not necessarily them thats the enemy but its the enemy thats blinding them

Canuckster1127 wrote:I've found there are a pretty wide spectrum of ideologies for those who call themselves atheists.

Some are militantly anti-religious thought. Some are open to discussing things and respond positively to a reasoned and respectful conversation. Some are really agnostics and can come to understand that better when the terms are described and clarified.

Lumping everyone into a big group and speaking in broad generalities usually says more about the people speaking in those terms than those being spoken about in my opinion.

Hey Bart? There are certainly a few atheists who exist who are polite and open to discussion; of this I have no doubt...Could you point me to them please? Bart, I encourage you to try a little experiment: go to the Richard Dawkins Forum. There arte literally thousands of members. I challenge you to come back with 10 polite atheists who are open to discussion...I have been on there myself and it is a sight to behold; I have never in my life seen a website which has/condones/allows such vitriol and profanities; it is astonishing. Then try "Infidels" with the same goal in mind. I submit to you brother that you will fail in your assignment. So let us not be too afraid to speak the truth: most atheists are ill-mannered, full of vitriol and rhetoric, and resort to shouting obscenities when confronted with a religious person. Of course there are exceptions — Touchingcloth being the most well-disciplined and polite atheist I have ever come across…By a mile! But let us not play Devil's Advocate for Devil's Advocate's sake, when we all know the truth of the matter.

God bless

DannyM wrote:

Canuckster1127 wrote:I've found there are a pretty wide spectrum of ideologies for those who call themselves atheists.

Some are militantly anti-religious thought. Some are open to discussing things and respond positively to a reasoned and respectful conversation. Some are really agnostics and can come to understand that better when the terms are described and clarified.

Lumping everyone into a big group and speaking in broad generalities usually says more about the people speaking in those terms than those being spoken about in my opinion.

Hey Bart? There are certainly a few atheists who exist who are polite and open to discussion; of this I have no doubt...Could you point me to them please? Bart, I encourage you to try a little experiment: go to the Richard Dawkins Forum. There arte literally thousands of members. I challenge you to come back with 10 polite atheists who are open to discussion...I have been on there myself and it is a sight to behold; I have never in my life seen a website which has/condones/allows such vitriol and profanities; it is astonishing. Then try "Infidels" with the same goal in mind. I submit to you brother that you will fail in your assignment. So let us not be too afraid to speak the truth: most atheists are ill-mannered, full of vitriol and rhetoric, and resort to shouting obscenities when confronted with a religious person. Of course there are exceptions — Touchingcloth being the most well-disciplined and polite atheist I have ever come across…By a mile! But let us not play Devil's Advocate for Devil's Advocate's sake, when we all know the truth of the matter.

God bless

We have had a few polite atheists over the years.

But I have yet to come across anyone associated with Dawkins that are in any way polite, rational or intellectually honest. It is like kindergarten bully hour over there. Kind of ironic since Dawkins is probably the weakest of the "new" atheists. I guess they need to hide their weakness behind all that noise.